The Accuracy of Wrist-Worn Photoplethysmogram–Measured Heart and Respiratory Rates in Abdominal Surgery Patients: Observational Prospective Clinical Validation Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Postoperative deterioration is often preceded by abnormal vital parameters. Therefore, vital parameters of postoperative patients are routinely measured by nursing staff. Wrist-worn sensors could potentially provide an alternative tool for the measurement of vital parameters in low-acuity settings. These devices would allow more frequent or even continuous measurements of vital parameters without relying on time-consuming manual measurements, provided their accuracy in this clinical population is established. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess the accuracy of heart rate (HR) and respiratory rate (RR) measures obtained via a wearable photoplethysmography (PPG) wristband in a cohort of postoperative patients. METHODS: ). The wearable obtained HR and RR measurements were compared to those of the reference monitor in the postanesthesia or intensive care unit. Bland-Altman and Clarke error grid analyses were performed to determine agreement and clinical accuracy. RESULTS: Data were collected for a median of 1.2 hours per patient. With a coverage of 94% for HR and 34% for RR, the device was able to provide accurate measurements for the large majority of the measurements as 98% and 93% of the measurements were within 5 bpm or 3 rpm of the reference signal. Additionally, 100% of the HR and 98% of the RR measurements were clinically acceptable on Clarke error grid analysis. CONCLUSIONS: The wrist-worn PPG device is able to provide measurements of HR and RR that can be seen as sufficiently accurate for clinical applications. Considering the coverage, the device was able to continuously monitor HR and report RR when measurements of sufficient quality were obtained. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03923127; https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03923127.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".